1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to elevated hunting or observation stands. More particularly, the present invention relates to hunting stands, primarily for use with trees, that transport the user to a desired elevation above ground. Known prior art stands are classified in United States Patent Class 182, Subclasses 133, 135-137, 141, and 187-188.
2. Description of the Related Art
Hunters have long recognized and appreciated the many advantages gained by hunting from elevated positions, especially with modern tree stands. Stands that have been properly designed and correctly deployed comfortably provide a safe, seated position at an elevation that is ideal for inconspicuously observing and bagging game animals. An elevated position amplifies the hunter's field of view, enlarging the potential target area.
Numerous diverse tree stands exist in the art. Large, relatively heavy permanent stands are well known. When properly built they can provide a sheltered hunting position well above ground offering superb visibility about a 360 degree radius. Permanent stands have several advantages. For example, they can comfortably accommodate more than one hunter, and they are spacious enough to move about. Some permanent stands have generous storage space, and they may even have electricity and various appliances. However, permanent stands are difficult and time consuming to erect, and as a practical matter, they cannot be moved between hunting locations without significant time-consuming effort.
On the other hand, portable tree stands are lightweight, relatively compact, and readily transportable. They can easily be carried into the woods for subsequent erection and use, and when a different hunting location is preferred, they readily disassemble for rapid deployment elsewhere. Portable stands typically comprise a seat supported upon a frame that is adapted to be semi-permanently attached to a tree. In typical “climber” designs, a compound frame has a pair of hinged members that that encircle the tree trunk. The frame elements are intermittently moved into and out of binding contact with the tree truck in response to user movement, and upward movement is enabled. As one fame element is loosened, it can be lifted vertically, while the other frame element temporarily remains in binding contact with the tree trunk.
Non-climbing tree stands often have seats supported above ground by one or more vertical ladder elements that elevate the frame. The seat, which may be swiveled for limited rotation so that a large ground radius may be conveniently observed, provides a comfortable and stable rest for the hunter. The frame may be anchored to the tree above ground by suitable teeth or pointed flanges that are forcibly locked into engagement with the tree truck by an encircling chain or rope that is tightened by a clamp or turnbuckle. Many portable designs are deployed at a selectable elevation established by the number and length of the ladder elements used by the stand. Once fastened in position, the seat cannot be easily moved vertically. In such designs the hunter gains access to the elevated seat by carefully ascending the ladder.
With climbing stands, on the other hand, the hunter may seat himself within the stand at ground level, and thereafter physically manipulate the stand to gradually climb the tree. Examples of manually-operated, climbing tree stands are provided by U.S. Pat. No. 3,727,723 issued Apr. 17, 1973, and U.S. Pat. No. 5,647,454 issued Jul. 15, 1997.
Other approaches to elevating tree stands exist. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,568,797 issued Mar. 9, 1971 discloses a stand with a collapsible seat housed within a frame moved by a hand-cranked pulley system. When the stand is attached to a tree it can be manually raised to the desired elevation with the pulley system. Similar crank-operated tree stand systems are seen in U.S. Pat. No. 3,731,762 issued May 8, 1973, U.S. Pat. No. 4,347,913 issued Sep. 7, 1982, U.S. Pat. No. 4,602,698 issued Jul. 29, 1986, U.S. Pat. No. 4,694,934 issued Sep. 22, 1987, and U.S. Pat. No. 5,009,284 issued Apr. 23, 1991.
A variation of the cable-driven theme is seen in U.S. Pat. No. 6,079,517 issued Jun. 27, 2000, showing a power driven tree stand that combines a winch with wheels that contact the tree truck.
A similar cable-elevated, wheeled carriage is seen in the powered deer stand depicted in U.S. Pat. Application No. 2003/0178251 published Sep. 25, 2003.
Motorized or power-driven tree stands are also known in the art. Since many hunters are elderly or physically handicapped or otherwise physically incapacitated, powered deer stands have recognized advantages. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,811,803 issued Mar. 14, 1989 illustrates a self-propelled deer stand that elevates hunters above the ground. A pivoted chassis rotates to a vertical position when the structure is raised off the ground. The deer stand uses a motor-powered winch and a cable assembly that elevates it.
However, there is a need or a power-driven hunting stand that avoids the use of cables or overhead chains or hoists. Such designs are cumbersome and difficult to deploy, especially for handicapped or elderly hunters. When installed carelessly or inadequately, they tend to be unstable. Often cable-driven designs require deployment, at least in part, upon an overhead branch, which can be difficult to reach, particularly when mounting the tree stand on pine trees. Further, cable-driven power stands do not adequately brace themselves against the tree trunk, increasing the risk of falling or slipping. Known systems involving wheels that contact the tree trunk are unstable and they tend to slip. Insufficient traction is developed by the wheels that rub against the external tree trunk.
Furthermore, there is a need for a power driven deer stand that is essentially portable.
While some portable designs are quite rugged despite their light weight, one common problem with so-called portable stands is that they can be relatively flimsy and unstable. On the other hand, ruggedized, heavy duty designs made of bulky metal parts tend to be heavy and cumbersome. However, it is important to realize that the disadvantages associated with heavier tree stands are outweighed by their dexterity. In the past, for example, hunters often preferred lightweight deer stands that could be easily carried in a backpack and quickly deployed after a single trip into the woods. Thus lightweight climbing stands have been popular. However, while a deer stand that can be carried into the woods in a single trip has obvious advantages, many hunters no longer demand such simplicity. Larger, heavier “portable” stands that can be carried by one or more hunters, or by a single hunter who makes separate trips, have significant advantages. What is important with heavier “portable” designs is that the parts, once transported, fit together easily on the job site for quick erection, and that the assembled unit operates safely and reliably. In this regard, it should be appreciated that a heavy-duty “portable” stand may be as stable a hunting platform as the typical elevated “permanent” stand.
The number of parts required to assemble the stand, or the number of trips into the woods carrying parts, is not critical to many users. It is not uncommon these days that heavier “portable” tree stands be delivered to the hunting site in an all-terrain vehicle or pickup truck, avoiding the necessity for time consuming trips where the hunter manually carries the stand's parts. Usually such stands are deployed by a group of hunters several days before the hunting season, so portability, light weight and speed of erection are features that are gradually diminishing in importance.
What is important to many hunters is that the stand be easy to climb. Thus a powered stand that transports the hunter to the desired elevated hunting position is desirable. Typical climbing stands that are operated manually are of no value to handicapped or elderly hunters. If a heavy duty “portable” stand that is rugged and powered can elevate the hunter automatically to an elevated position, the disadvantages associated with increased weight will be forgotten and excused. Further, such a system must offer a stable and safe support once deployed, and ease of both ingress and egress must be facilitated.